The last earthquake that affected the city of Coquimbo took
place in September 2015 and had a magnitude of Mw=8.3, resulting in localized
damage in low-lying areas of the city. In addition, another seismic gap north
of the 2015 earthquake rupture area has been identified; therefore, a
significant earthquake (Mw=8.2 to 8.5) and tsunami could occur in the near
future. The present paper develops a tsunami fragility curve for the city
of Coquimbo based on field survey data and tsunami numerical simulations. The
inundation depth of the 2015 Chile tsunami in Coquimbo was estimated by means
of numerical simulation with the Non-hydrostatic Evolution of Ocean WAVEs (NEOWAVE) model and five nested grids with a
maximum grid resolution of 10 m. The fragility curve exhibited behavior
similar to that of other curves in flat areas in Japan, where little damage
was observed at relatively high inundation depths. In addition, it was
observed that Coquimbo experienced less damage than Dichato (Chile); in fact,
at an inundation depth of 2 m, Dichato had a ∼75 %
probability of damage, while Coquimbo proved to have only a 20 %
probability. The new fragility curve was used to estimate the damage by
possible future tsunamis in the area. The damage assessment showed that
∼50 % of the structures in the low-lying area of Coquimbo
have a high probability of damage in the case of a tsunami generated off the
coast of the study area if the city is rebuilt with the same types of structures.

On 16 September 2015 a Mw=8.3 earthquake took place off the coast of the Coquimbo Region (USGS:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us20003k7a#executive, last access: 10 July 2018).
The earthquake generated a tsunami that inundated low-lying areas of the
city of Coquimbo, with run-up reaching up to 6.4 m and a penetration distance
of up to 700 m (Aránguiz et al., 2016;
Contreras-López et al., 2016), resulting in reports of significant
damage to houses and public infrastructure (Contreras-López et al., 2016). This earthquake filled
the seismic gap that had existed since at least the last significant
earthquake along the Coquimbo–Illapel seismic region in 1943 (Melgar et al., 2016; Ye et
al., 2016). However, the region just north of the 2015 rupture area has not
experienced significant seismic activity since the 1922 Mw=8.3 event
(Melgar et al., 2016; Ye et al., 2016). Thus, it is recommended that reconstruction plans and new tsunami
mitigation measures consider potential impacts due to possible future
tsunamis generated north of the 2015 Illapel earthquake rupture zone.

With regard to the assessment of structural damage within the exposed area
against a potential tsunami hazard, two different approaches were identified.
Damage can be estimated deterministically based on the forces acting on a
single structure (Nandasena et al., 2012; Nistor et al., 2009; Shimozono and Sato, 2016; Wei et al.,
2015); however, such an analysis could be extremely time-consuming and
impractical for an entire city due to the high-resolution numerical
simulations (∼2 m) that are required. Alternatively, the
assessment of structural damage could be performed probabilistically by means of
fragility curves (Koshimura et al., 2009a, b; Suppasri et al., 2011). Tsunami
fragility curves represent the probability of damage to structures in
relation to a tsunami intensity measure, such as the inundation depth,
current velocity or hydrodynamic force Koshimura
et al., 2009a), although a fully probabilistic approach may use a wide range
of possible scenarios; thus, both hazard assessment and damage assessment
are probabilistic (Park et al., 2017). A classical approach
uses linear models with ordinary least-square methods and aggregated data.
This methodology has been applied to obtain empirical tsunami fragility
curves for Banda Aceh in Indonesia (Koshimura et al.,
2009b) and Thailand (Suppasri et al., 2011)
after the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami. The same methodology was applied to
areas affected by the 2009 Samoa tsunami (Gokon et al.,
2014). In a similar manner, this method was applied in Japan after the 2011
Tohoku tsunami, allowing several fragility curves that considered
several damage levels and different building materials to be obtained
(Suppasri et al., 2013). After the 2010 Chile tsunami, Mas et al. (2012) developed the first
tsunami fragility curve in Chile for masonry and mixed structures in
Dichato. In recent years, new methodologies have been proposed for the
development of tsunami fragility curves that use disaggregated data and
different classes of models such as the generalized linear model,
generalized additive model and non-parametric model (Charvet et al., 2015, 2017;
Macabuag et al., 2016). These new methodologies propose a more
comprehensive analysis in order to select appropriate statistical models and
identify which tsunami intensity measure gives the best representation of
the observed damage data (Macabuag et al., 2016). Even though
the use of different classes of models could offer an improvement over the
ordinary least-square method, there is no quantifiable assessment of the
effect of data aggregation and linear model assumption violation on the
predictive power of a model. (Macabuag et al., 2016). For
example, the fragility curves developed by Suppasri et
al. (2013) have been applied to building damage estimation in Napier, New
Zealand (Fraser et al., 2014), and both building damage and
economic loss estimation in Seaside, Oregon (Wiebe and Cox,
2014). The former study also applied the fragility curves of Dichato, Chile
(Mas et al., 2012), and American Samoa (Gokon et al., 2014).

Tsunami fragility curves are obtained for a given area under a given
scenario; therefore, they may not be applicable to other areas of interest
since the tsunami characteristics and building materials may differ
(Koshimura et al., 2009a;
Suppasri et al., 2011). For example, buildings along the Sanriku ria coast
in Japan experienced greater damage than structures located on the plains of
Sendai (Suppasri et al., 2012b,
2013); thus, De Risi et al. (2017) analyzed the influence of tsunami velocity on structural damage
on ria-type and plain-type coasts. They found that while flow velocity
improves the fragility models, the two coastal typologies should be
considered separately when velocity is included in the analysis. Moreover,
Song et al. (2017) used a bivariate intensity
measure to evaluate tsunami losses, such that both flow velocity and
inundation depth are analyzed. They found that flow velocity is important
for buildings located less than 1 km from the coastline. In addition, they
found that reinforced concrete buildings are the most sensitive to the
incorporation of velocity, while wood structures exhibit no sensitivity to this variable.

The Coquimbo area provides a good opportunity to develop a fragility curve
and assess potential tsunami impact since the tsunami in 2015 did not damage
all structures and some of the damaged structures have been repaired or
rebuilt on their original sites. This study develops an empirical fragility
curve for the Coquimbo area using field survey data and numerical simulation
of the 2015 Chile tsunami. In addition, we estimated the probability of
structural damage for a deterministic tsunami scenario using the Coquimbo
fragility curve. Section 2 gives a description of the study area, with a
short review of the local seismicity. Section 3 presents the methodology of
the fragility curve development, which includes a comparison with existing
tsunami fragility curves. Section 4 presents an application of the fragility
curves. Finally, Sect. 5 gives the main conclusions of the present research.

The city of Coquimbo is located on the southern shore of Coquimbo Bay
(29.96∘ S). The Coquimbo area was mentioned by the conquistadors
as a good place for a port and the location became important in the 19th century due to the
natural protection it offered against southwest swell waves. Coquimbo
Bay is open to the northwest and characterized by a lowland topography with
a long, flat, sandy beach (Aránguiz et al.,
2016), similar to the coastal plains of Sendai. Like all coastal cities in
Chile, Coquimbo is located over the subduction zone of the Nazca plate
beneath the South American plate (18–44∘ S). The
convergence rate of the plates is 68 mm yr−1 along the Chile subduction zone
and large seismic events take place every 10 years on average
(Métois et al. 2016). In fact, three events over a magnitude of 8.0 have taken place in the last 6 years, namely, the
2010 Maule (34–38∘ S), 2014 Iquique (19–20∘ S) and
2015 Illapel (30–32∘ S) earthquakes.

Figure 1Seismicity of central Chile. (a) Space–time plot of
large earthquakes along central Chile. Red bars are the events along the
Copiapó–Coquimbo region and the red stars represent smaller seismic events.
The blue bars are events along the Coquimbo–Illapel seismic region, while the
black lines represent events along the Los Vilos–Constitución segment. The
dashed line is the large event of 1730, which ruptured both the Los
Vilos–Constitución and Coquimbo–Illapel segments (Beck et al., 1998;
Lomnitz, 2004; Métois et al., 2016; Nishenko, 1985). (b) Map
showing the cities and towns mentioned in the text. The yellow star represents
the epicenter of the 2015 Illapel earthquake. The thin black lines are isobaths
at water depths of 200, 1000 and 3000 m. The thick black line is the Peru–Chile trench.

Figure 1 shows the seismic events recorded in the Coquimbo area. The oldest
record of a tsunami is that of the 1730 event. This earthquake generated a
destructive tsunami that destroyed Valparaiso and Concepción and flooded
low-lying areas in Japan (Cisternas et al., 2011). The
tsunami destroyed several ranches on the shore of Coquimbo
(Soloviev and Go, 1975). Although the 1880 and 1943 earthquakes are considered to be similar in size
(Nishenko, 1985), it is observed that the behaviors of the tsunamis generated by these events seem
to be different. While the former generated large columns of water that
resulted in the anchor chain of a ship snapping in Coquimbo
(Soloviev and Go, 1975) and a deep submarine cable breaking
off the coast near the mouth of the Limarí River
(Lomnitz, 2004), the latter generated a minor tsunami
that damaged fishing boats in Los Vilos and raised the water level by 80 cm
in Valparaiso (Soloviev and Go, 1975), while no tsunami was
reported in Coquimbo. Conversely, the 2015 tsunami reached up to 4.75 m at
the Coquimbo tide gauge, with a run-up of 6.4 m (Aránguiz et al., 2016;
Contreras-López et al., 2016). Moreover, a maximum tsunami amplitude of
2 m was observed at the Valparaiso tide gauge
(Aránguiz et al., 2016). The main reason behind
this is that the 1943 event broke the deepest portion of the subduction
interface, while the 2015 Illapel earthquake had a shallower rupture area
and a larger magnitude (Fuentes et al.,
2016; Okuwaki et al., 2016), resulting in a larger initial tsunami amplitude
(Aránguiz et al., 2016).

The largest tsunami ever recorded in Coquimbo took place in 1922. It arrived
in Coquimbo 2 h after the earthquake, with three large waves observed,
the third of which was the largest, with a maximum inundation height of 7 m
and an inland penetration of 2 km. The part of the city located on the
southern shore of Coquimbo Bay was totally destroyed by both the water and
tsunami debris (Soloviev and Go, 1975). In a similar manner,
the tsunami reached inundation heights of up to 9 m at Chañaral and
6–7 m at Caldera. The tsunami was also observed in Japan, with maximum
amplitudes ranging from 60 to 70 cm (Carvajal et al., 2017;
Soloviev and Go, 1975), which is similar to the amplitudes of the
2015 event (80 cm), but larger than those of the 1943 event, which were 10–25 cm
(Beck et al., 1998). Another significant event was the 1849 earthquake,
which generated a localized tsunami that mainly affected
Coquimbo. The tsunami arrived 10 to 30 min after the earthquake, penetrated
300 m horizontally and rose 5 m above the high tide mark (Soloviev and Go, 1975).

The development of the fragility functions in the present work required
three main steps: first, data collection regarding building damage levels in
the Coquimbo area and tsunami inundation heights for numerical modeling
validation; second, selection of a rupture model of the 2015 Illapel
earthquake and validation of the tsunami inundation heights for estimation
of tsunami inundation depth; and third, GIS analysis and statistical
analysis for correlation between damage level and simulated tsunami inundation depth.

Figure 2Photographs of structures undamaged and masonry houses damaged by the
16 September 2015 tsunami in the Coquimbo area. The red letter d indicates the
observed tsunami inundation depth. All photos were taken on 22 September 2015.

3.1 Building damage and tsunami inundation data

Only 5 to 7 days after the 2015 event, a team surveyed the affected area and
collected more than 40 inundation height, inundation depth and tsunami run-up
measurements in the Coquimbo inundation area. The field measurements
followed established post-tsunami survey procedures
(Dengler et al., 2003; Dominey-Howes et al.,
2012; Synolakis and Okal, 2005) and were corrected for tide level at the
time of maximum inundation. At the same time, 585 structures within the
inundation area were identified and classified as mixed structures made of
wood and masonry (568), reinforced concrete buildings of eight or more
stories (4) and very light structures that did not meet minimal building
standards (13). The present analysis considered the mixed structures only;
therefore, the reinforced concrete and light structures were removed from
the fragility curve analysis. Typical structures within the inundated area
of Coquimbo have one story and are made of masonry, though there are some
two-story buildings made of both masonry (the first floor) and wood (the
second floor). In order to facilitate the comparison with existing fragility
curves (e.g., Dichato) all data were combined in a single category: mixed
structures. Figure 2 shows typical mixed structures and inundation depth
marks surveyed in Coquimbo immediately after the 2015 tsunami. Figure 2a
and b show masonry houses that were not damaged by the tsunami despite
inundation depths that ranged from 1.5 to 2 m.

Meanwhile, Fig. 2c and d
show houses with moderate to major damage, ready for inhabitation again after major
repairs. In fact, the house in Fig. 2c was being repaired at the time of
the field survey and the gray wall in the corner had been built a few days
earlier. Meanwhile, the house in Fig. 2d was abandoned since all interior
walls, windows, doors and the roof were destroyed and major repairs and
retrofitting would be needed. Figure 2e shows a destroyed structure with its
interior walls and roof completely removed, while Fig. 2f shows the
remaining foundation of a washed-away structure. Even though the damage to
the structure could be due to both the earthquake and tsunami, it was
observed that damage due to the earthquake was limited (Candia et al., 2017) and the structures most affected by
the earthquake were made of adobe (Fernández et al., 2017). In addition,
the authors had the opportunity to compare damage to inundated and
non-inundated houses in Coquimbo in order to verify that the structural
damage to inundated houses was due to the tsunami. In order to avoid
categorizing light damage (due to the earthquake) as tsunami damage, a
two-level damage scale was used. Thus, the present work assumed that the
damage to flooded structures was due only to the tsunami.

In addition, the two-level damage scale was used due to the small number of
inundated structures (568) and for comparison with the existing fragility
curve of Dichato (Mas et al., 2012),
which has only two damage levels. The first level, called “not destroyed,”
included structures with no damage or minor to major damage, corresponding
to levels 1–3 given by Suppasri et al. (2013).
These damage levels indicate that there is slight to severe damage to
nonstructural components; therefore, it would be possible to use the
structures after moderate to major repairs (Fig. 2a–c). The other
damage level, called “destroyed”, included damage levels 4 to 6 according
to Suppasri et al. (2013), i.e., structures that underwent severe damage to
walls or columns or that had completely collapsed (Fig. 2d–f).

Previous works carried out damage inspections using satellite images and
field surveys (Koshimura et al., 2009b; Mas et al., 2012; Suppasri et al., 2011); however, the
satellite image method assumes that buildings with intact roofs are not
destroyed (Suppasri et al., 2011), and
severe damage to columns or interior walls may not be observed
(Mas et al., 2012), as in the case of the
houses shown in Fig. 2c and d. Therefore, the present work employed
damage detection based on field surveys only. Figure 3a shows the surveyed
buildings and the damage levels assigned to the 568 mixed structures. The
four reinforced concrete buildings (R.C.) and the 13 light structures (L.S.)
that did not meet minimal building standards are also included in the
figure. Figure 3b shows the inundation height and run-up measurements
recorded during the field survey. It is observed that the maximum inundation
height was reached in the corner, where the coastal road and the railway
converge. Most of the damaged structures were identified in that location as well.

3.2 Tsunami inundation depth

Tsunami inundation depth was estimated as the difference between tsunami
inundation height and ground elevation. Since the inundation heights were
measured at a few locations across the inundation area and there is a lack of
tsunami traces in the wetland, interpolation of tsunami height may not be
suitable; therefore, the tsunami heights were obtained from tsunami
numerical simulation of the 2015 event. We tested four available
finite-fault models, namely those of Li et al. (2016), Ruiz et al. (2016), Okuwaki et al. (2016)
and Shrivastava et al. (2016), and the best fit
was selected according to tide gauges in Coquimbo and Valparaiso and DART
buoy 32402. Once the best slip model was selected, we used the field
measurements of inundation height and run-up to select an appropriate
dry-land roughness coefficient. The model proposed by
Li et al. (2016) is obtained from iterative modeling
of teleseismic body waves as well as tsunami records at DART buoys. Since
the magnitude of the proposed model is Mw=8.21, the slip distribution was
multiplied by a factor of 1.38; thus, all events have the same magnitude: 8.3.

The tsunami initial condition was estimated to be equal to the seafloor
displacement. In addition, the vertical displacement from each subfault was
computed using a kinematic solution of the planar fault model of Okada (1985).
The numerical simulations were carried out with
the Non-hydrostatic Evolution of Ocean WAVEs (NEOWAVE) model
(Yamazaki et al., 2009, 2011). This
model is a staggered finite-difference model that solves the nonlinear
shallow water equation and uses a vertical velocity term to account for
weakly dispersive waves. The model generates the tsunami initial condition,
propagation and inundation by means of several nested grids of different
resolutions. The present research used five nested grids, as shown in Fig. 4.
The level 1 grid describes tsunami propagation from generation to the
continental shelf and to the Pacific Ocean at a resolution of 2 arcmin
(∼3600 m). This grid was generated from 30 arcmin General Bathymetric Chart of the Oceans (GEBCO) data.
The level 2 and level 3 grids were built from nautical charts 4100, 4112,
and 4113 and it had a resolution of 30 and 6 arcsec, respectively. The level 4
grid covered Coquimbo Bay and was built from nautical chart 4111, and had a
resolution of 1 arcsec (∼30 m). Finally, the level 5 grid had
a resolution of 1∕3 arcsec (∼10 m) and was built from
bathymetry from nautical chart 4111 and topography from a digital terrain model (DTM) with contour lines with a
resolution of 2 m provided by the Coquimbo office of the
Ministry of Housing (MINVU). The topography used high-resolution data; thus,
the most important features, such as the coastal road embankment, railway,
river and wetland, are well represented (see Fig. 4, grid 5). Numerical
simulations in Valparaiso involved four nested grids with a maximum grid
resolution of 1 arcsec (∼30 m).

The roughness coefficient was defined as n=0.025 on the seabed, as
recommended for tsunamis (Bricker et al., 2015;
Kotani et al., 1998); however, we tested several roughness coefficient
values in coastal, wetland and urban areas in order to obtain the best fit
of tsunami inundation height. The validation of the numerical simulation was
performed using the root mean square error and the parameters K and κ
given by Eqs. (1) and (2) (Aida, 1978). The
variable Ki is defined as Ki=xi/yi, where xi and
yi are recorded and computed tsunami heights, respectively. The Japan
Society of Civil Engineers provides guidelines, which recommend that
0.95<K<1.05 and κ<1.45 for there to be good agreement (Aida, 1978; Gokon et al., 2014).

(1)logK=1n∑i=1nlogKi(2)logκ=1n∑i=1nlogKi2-(logK)2

Figure 5 shows the tsunami initial conditions of the four slip models and
the tsunami waveforms over an elapsed time of 4 h at three selected
gauges, namely Coquimbo, Valparaiso and DART buoy 32402. Even though the
modified Li et al. (2016) model overestimates the
maximum amplitude at the DART buoy, the simulation exhibits a very good
agreement with the tsunami record in Coquimbo. When the Mw=8.3 models
proposed by Ruiz et al. (2016) and Shrivastava et al. (2016) were analyzed, it was
possible to observe a good agreement at the DART buoy and Valparaiso tide
gauge, although the amplitude in Coquimbo is underestimated by more than a
meter. The Okuwaki et al. (2016) model overestimates
both the DART buoy and Valparaiso tide gauge, despite the second tsunami
wave reaching a similar amplitude in Coquimbo. Nevertheless, the maximum
tsunami amplitude is underestimated. Therefore, the modified
Li et al. (2016) model was selected to assess the suitable Manning roughness coefficient.

Figure 5Tsunami initial conditions of four source models and comparison of
tsunami records with simulated tsunami waveforms at DART 32402, Coquimbo and Valparaiso.

Figure 6 shows the inundation area and tsunami inundation height results
obtained from the numerical simulations of the Li et
al. (2016) model, with four different roughness coefficients. The tested
coefficients are n=0.025 for coastal and riverine areas, 0.04 and 0.05 for
low-density urban areas, and 0.06 for medium-density urban areas
(Bricker et al., 2015; Kotani et al., 1998). From
the figure, it is possible to observe that the best fit is obtained for
n=0.025, which resulted in K=1.05 and κ<1.45, corresponding to
good agreement. For higher roughness coefficients, the tsunami
inundation heights are underestimated. In addition, the larger the
coefficient, the smaller the inundation area. This behavior could be
explained by the fact that a significant part of the flooded area is a
wetland and the developed area is rather small, with a low-density
residential distribution. Thus, the inundation depth is computed from the
inundation area given by the modified Li et al. (2016) slip model, with a
roughness coefficient of n=0.025.

3.3 Fragility curve

The construction of a fragility curve requires a correlation between the
structural damage level and a tsunami intensity measure, such as the
inundation depth, current velocity or hydrodynamic force. To this end, we
used the classical approach with aggregated data and a least-square fit
(Koshimura et al., 2009a), in which a sample size
is defined such that each range of the tsunami intensity measure includes
the defined number of structures. Then the damage probability is calculated
by counting the number of destroyed or not-destroyed structures for each
range of the intensity measure. Finally, the fragility function is developed
through regression analysis of the discrete set of damage probabilities and
the tsunami intensity measure. Therefore, it is assumed that the cumulative
probability P of damage follows the standardized normal or lognormal
distribution function given in Eq. (3). Φ is the distribution
function, x is the hydrodynamic feature of the tsunami, and μ and
σ are the mean and standard deviation of x, respectively. The
values of μ and σ are calculated by means of least-square
fitting of x and the inverse of Φ, (Φ−1) on normal paper
given by Eq. (4).

(3)P(x)=Φx-μσ(4)x=σΦ-1+μ

The hydrodynamic force per unit width (kN m−1) acting on a structure is
computed as the drag force given by Eq. (5), where the drag coefficient
is assumed to be CD=1.0 for simplicity, ρ is the density of sea
water (1025 kg m−3), U is the flow velocity (m s−1) and h is
the inundation depth (m).

(5)F=12CDρhU2

Table 1Statistical parameters for developed fragility curves obtained from a
normal distribution.

Figure 7 shows the results of the simulated tsunami intensity measures. It
can be observed that the topography plays an important role in tsunami
inundation, as the maximum inundation depth values (Fig. 7a) occur at the
beach and wetland, while developed areas behind the railway and areas
distant from the shore present low inundation depths. In a similar manner,
high velocities occur close to the sites of rapid topographic changes
(Fig. 7b), such as the lee side of the coastal road, while low velocities
are observed within the developed area under analysis (<3 m s−1).
Since hydrodynamic force is a combination of both inundation depth and flow
velocity (Fig. 7c), the developed area behind the railway presents low
force as well. Figure 8 shows the results of the tsunami fragility curves of
Coquimbo for inundation depth, flow velocity and hydrodynamic force. The
sample size was defined to be 40 structures; thus, 15 ranges were used.
Figure 8a shows the histogram, while Fig. 8c shows the relationship
between damage probability and inundation depth (upper panel), flow velocity
(central panel) and hydrodynamic force (lower panel), with the solid line
representing the best-fit curve of the plot. The fragility curves were
estimated by means of regression analysis, as shown in Fig. 8b. The
statistical parameters of the developed fragility functions are shown in
Table 1. In Fig. 8 it is possible to observe that inundation depths lower
than 1.5 m did not generate damage to the surveyed structures and the damage
probability of the curve is less than 10 %. Moreover, the fragility curve
shows that inundation depths higher than 4 m could result in a 100 %
probability of severe damage to mixed structures in Coquimbo. With regard to
the flow velocity, it is observed that most of the simulated data are in the
range of 0 to 2.5 m s−1, with a damage probability of less than 40 %. In a
similar manner, a hydrodynamic force lower than 2.5 kN m−1 proves to result in
a damage probability of less than 20 %.

Since the 2015 tsunami had a moderate impact, with low inundation depths and
flow velocities in developed areas, it becomes very important to assess the
tsunami damage due to possible events taking place in the same rupture area
as that of the 1922 earthquake since large inundation depths were reported
there (see Sect. 2).

Figure 8Developing the tsunami fragility curve. (a) Histogram of the
number of destroyed and not-destroyed structures in terms of the tsunami
intensity measures within the inundation area. (b) Data plotted on
normal probability paper and least-square fit. (c) Fragility function
for building damage in terms of the tsunami intensity measures; the solid line
is the best-fit curve of the plot (circles show the distribution of damage probability).

3.4 Comparison with existing fragility curves

This section compares the fragility curve obtained in Coquimbo with curves
obtained in other places after recent events. The statistical parameters of
existing fragility curves are shown in Table 2. One curve is that of
Okushiri, Japan, which was obtained for wooden structures after the 1993
tsunami event. The analysis included 523 houses and a range of approximately
50 structures (Suppasri et al., 2012a). In a similar manner,
the fragility curve of Dichato, Chile, involved 915 mixed-material
structures and a range of 50 structures after the 2010 Chile tsunami
(Mas et al., 2012). A more comprehensive
analysis was conducted in Banda Aceh, Indonesia, after the 2004 Indian Ocean
tsunami (Koshimura et al., 2009b). This case involved
48 910 structures made of wood, timber and lightly reinforced concrete
constructions, with a range of 1000 structures. The proposed curves were
constructed for inundation depth, flow velocity and hydrodynamic force.
After the 2009 Samoa event, Gokon et al. (2014)
developed a fragility curve for mixed structures, which included wood,
masonry and reinforced concrete, for the same three tsunami intensity
measures as in the previously mentioned study. Similarly, the fragility
curves of Thailand were developed for two provinces, namely, Phang Nga and
Phuket, with 2508 and 1033 structures, respectively. In addition, all data
were combined in order to develop a fragility curve for mixed-material
structures and inundation depth (Suppasri
et al., 2011). Figure 9a shows a comparison of the Coquimbo fragility curve
with two-level damage curves of Dichato, Okushiri, Banda Aceh, American Samoa
and Thailand. It is seen that Coquimbo experienced less damage than Dichato
and Okushiri at inundation depths lower than 3 m. In fact, at an inundation
depth of 2 m, Dichato and Okushiri have a 68 %–75 % probability of damage,
while in Coquimbo the probability is only 20 %. The high probability of
damage in Dichato and Okushiri could be due to the large number of
structures made of wood and lightweight materials with little ability to
withstand tsunami flows (Mas et al., 2012). Even though the building materials in Coquimbo are similar, it is
observed in Fig. 7b that distance from the shore and the railway
embankment decrease flow velocity and thus tsunami energy; therefore, the
same inundation depth generates less damage to structures. In a similar
manner, the fragility curve for mixed-material structures in Thailand shows
a high probability of damage at an inundation depth of 2 m (∼50 %),
but a 100 % probability of damage is reached at inundation depths
higher than 8 m. In the case of Banda Aceh, the curve shows a low
probability of damage (<20 %) at an inundation depth of 2 m,
which is comparable to Coquimbo; however, the damage probability in Coquimbo
increases rapidly as the inundation depth increases, reaching 100 % at an
inundation depth of only 4 m, which could be a result of most of the houses
having only one or two stories (see Fig. 2).

Figure 9Tsunami fragility curves for damage probability developed for other
locations and different damage levels. (a) Two levels of damage
obtained for three different cities in Chile, Japan and Indonesia. (b) Six
damage levels for wooden structures given by Suppasri et al. (2013).
(c) Six damage levels for mixed-material structures by Suppasri et
al. (2013). (d) Four damage levels for wooden houses given by Suppasri
et al. (2012b). (e) Four damage levels for mixed-material structures
given by Suppasri et al. (2012b).

In addition, it was observed in
Banda Aceh that structures were quite vulnerable when flow velocity exceeded
2.5 m s−1, with a damage probability of 60 % and a 100 % probability of
damage at velocities larger than 4 m s−1 (Koshimura et al., 2009b).
These results are in good agreement with the Coquimbo fragility
curve. Moreover, the topography of Banda Aceh is characterized by low land
with an elevation of around 3 m, which is also similar to Coquimbo. With
regard to American Samoa, the curve shows a low probability of damage at
inundation depths lower than 2 m; it begins to increase to up to 80 % when
the inundation depth reaches 6 m. It is important to mention that the Samoa
fragility curves were developed considering different types of structures,
including wood, brick and reinforced concrete. In addition, the fragility
curve as a function of flow velocity shows significant damage
(∼50 %) at velocities of 2 m s−1, and only an 80 %
probability of damage at velocities as high as 8 m s−1 (Gokon
et al., 2014). Since all types of structures are analyzed in a single curve,
it is believed that low velocities would easily cause damage to wooden
structures, while damage to reinforced concrete structures would require
higher inundation depths and flow velocities. The relatively high damage
probability at low inundation depths could also be due to the ria-type coast
of American Samoa (Gokon et al., 2014).

Table 2Summary of statistical parameters and damage levels for empirical
fragility curves (Mas et al., 2012; Suppasri et al., 2012b, 2013) including the
current case of Coquimbo. μ and σ are statistical parameters for
normal distribution, while μ′ and σ′ are the same parameters for
lognormal distribution. R.C. indicates reinforced concrete structures.

Figure 9b and c show the comparison of the Coquimbo fragility curve with
the curves given by Suppasri et al. (2013) for wooden
and mixed-material structures in Japan, respectively. The study considered
more than 250 000 damaged buildings surveyed after the 2011 Tohoku tsunami and made it possible to analyze different damage levels and building
materials. In general, it is seen that wooden and mixed structures in Japan
have similar behavior. If damage level 4 (complete destruction) is analyzed,
the damage probability is higher than in Coquimbo at an inundation depth
lower than 2 m. Wooden and mixed structures in Japan present a relatively
high probability of complete destruction (level 4), ranging from 50 % to
60 %, while in Coquimbo it is only 20 %.

Another group of fragility curves for wooden and mixed structures – shown
in Fig. 9d and e, respectively – were obtained from survey data of the
2011 Japan tsunami in the Sendai and Ishinomaki plains (Suppasri et al., 2012b). The curves
show that structures located in flat areas were less impacted by the tsunami
despite significant inundation depths, in contrast to what happened in areas
with ria topography, such as the Sanriku coast (Suppasri et al., 2012a, 2013),
and semi-closed bays such as Dichato (Mas et al., 2012). This behavior is in
good agreement with damage observed in the Coquimbo area, where the flat
nature of the area and distance from the shore could decrease tsunami
impact. Thus, based on the influence of inundation depth and flow velocity
on tsunami damage, De Risi et al. (2017)
proposed the development of vulnerability models related to specific
topographic contexts, such as plain-type or ria-type coasts. They found that
ria-type coasts experience greater damage probability than plain-type coasts
at the same inundation depth.

It is noteworthy that the Coquimbo fragility curve for destruction or
complete damage overlaps with the minor-damage-level curve for wood and
mixed-material houses in flat areas in Japan (Fig. 9d and e). A possible
explanation is that houses in Japan are relatively new and built according
to strict construction standards (Suppasri et al., 2012b), in contrast to
what was observed in Coquimbo, where old houses are found (see Fig. 2),
although it could also be due to the local topographic features of Coquimbo.
This finding suggests that both topography and structure quality should be
considered in tsunami damage estimation.

This section presents an example of the use of fragility curves to estimate
tsunami damage through a deterministic tsunami scenario in Coquimbo. We
first define a tsunami scenario, then we run the numerical simulation to
obtain the inundation depth and, finally, we estimate the tsunami damage in
Coquimbo. Since earthquake damage in the Coquimbo Region was limited in 2015
(Candia et al., 2017; Fernández et al., 2017), it is assumed that the damage to structures is
due exclusively to the tsunami.

Figure 10Upper panels show slip distributions along scenario source models. The
gray rectangles outline each scenario source segment. The moment magnitude for
each scenario source model is denoted in the top left of the corresponding panel.
Lower panels show the inter-seismic coupling (ISC) model from Métois et al. (2016) (left panel),
Global Centroid Moment Tensor (GCMT) solutions (center panel) and the inverted slip model from Okuwaki et al. (2016)
(right panel), which were used to construct the scenario source models. The star
denotes the epicenter of the 2015 Illapel earthquake determined by the National
Seismological Center (CSN, for its initials in Spanish). The blue contours
delimit the inverted slip distribution every 2.08 m for the 2015 Illapel
earthquake (Okuwaki et al., 2016).

4.1 Tsunami source model

Based on Fig. 1, three possible segments can be defined, namely, the
Copiapó–Coquimbo, Coquimbo–Illapel and Illapel–Constitución regions.
However, events in the Illapel–Constitución region, including those
of 1822 and 1906, have never generated a tsunami in Coquimbo
(Soloviev and Go, 1975), and only the 1730 event, which
ruptured the Coquimbo–Illapel segment, generated a tsunami in the area of
interest (Cisternas et al., 2011); therefore, possible
tsunamis generated in the Valparaiso segment were not considered in the
present analysis. In a similar manner, earthquakes on the Coquimbo–Illapel
segment were not considered because the 2015 Illapel earthquake filled the
seismic gap that had existed since the last major earthquake in 1943 or
earlier events (Ye et al., 2016); thus, no significant
earthquakes that generate significant tsunamis could take place there in the
near future. Conversely, the northern segment has presented no relevant
seismic activity since 1922, i.e., 95 years before 2017 (see Fig. 1);
moreover, the previous significant event took place in 1819 (73 years before
the 1922 event). Therefore, the Copiapó–Coquimbo segment is of
particular interest regarding possible future earthquakes and tsunamis in Coquimbo.

It is important to note that the small event in 1849 (magnitude 7.5,
according to Lomnitz, 2004) generated a 5 m tsunami
in Coquimbo. Despite the small earthquake magnitude and large tsunami run-up
of the event, there is no scientific evidence that a tsunami–earthquake
occurred. In addition, the 1922 Atacama event had a complex source of three
time-clustered shocks (Beck et al., 1998). Therefore, it
seemed reasonable to separate the northern segments into two different
seismic regions, with one segment covering Copiapó to Punta Choros
(Fig. 10b) and the second segment from Punta Choros to Ovalle (Fig. 10a),
which also coincides with the estimated rupture length of the 1849 event (see Fig. 1).

Figure 11Results of tsunami numerical simulations for case 1 and the three
scenarios, S1, S2 and S1+S2. Left column panels show vertical
seafloor displacement. Central column panels show maximum inundation depth; the
asterisk indicates the location of the tide gauge and the thin black lines
represent the contour lines every 2 m. Right column panels show tsunami waveform
over an elapsed time of 4 h at the Coquimbo tide gauge G.

Either a probabilistic or deterministic approach could be used for the
tsunami hazard assessment and damage estimation. While the former takes into
account many uncertainties related to generation, propagation and inundation
(Cheung et al., 2011; Geist and Parsons, 2006; Heidarzadeh and Kijko, 2011;
Horspool et al., 2014; Park and Cox, 2016), the latter uses credible
worst-case scenarios based on historical events (Aránguiz
et al., 2014; Mitsoudis et al., 2012; Wijetunge, 2012). However, the
coupling coefficient could be used to assess the shape of possible future
deterministic earthquakes (Métois et al.,
2016; Pulido et al., 2015) since reasonable heterogeneous slip models could
be predicted by the degree of interseismic locking (Calisto et al., 2016; Gonzalez-Carrasco et al.,
2015). Thus, the slip distribution S at arbitrary space ξ is
represented as given by Eq. (6):

(6)S(ξ)=∫t0t1C(ξ,t)V(ξ)dt-∑jsj(ξ)+pj(ξ),

where C is the interseismic coupling, ranging from 0 to 1. The
interseismic coupling model adopted in this study is from Métois et al. (2016), which is
derived from inverting Global Positioning System (GPS) measurements along
the Chilean margin (18–38∘ S) that have been made by
international teams since the early 1990s (see Métois et al., 2016, and
references therein). It provides a reasonable estimate of the degree of
locking between the Nazca and the South American plates, indicating strong
coupling along the scenario source regions (see Fig. 10d to f). V is
the plate convergence rate at ξ, derived from the NNR-NUVEL-1A model
(DeMets et al., 1994), and t0 and t1 delimit the
interseismic period for integration. sj is the slip of the small event
(4.8≤Mw≤7.9) at the jth location, which is listed in the
Global Centroid Moment Tensor (GCMT) catalog
(http://www.globalcmt.org/CMTsearch.html, last access: 10 July 2018; see Fig. 10e), and pj is
the post-seismic slip following sj. Each amount of slip sj is
calculated based on the seismic moment obtained by the GCMT and the
empirical relationship between rupture area and the moment magnitude
introduced by Wells and Coppersmith (1994). The rigidity modulus for the calculation of moment magnitude of each
sj is computed with the layered, near-source structure adopted in the
source study by Okuwaki et al. (2016). We eliminated
the Mw=8.3 2015 Illapel earthquake from the GCMT list and instead considered
its contribution to the scenario source models with the inverted slip model
developed by Okuwaki et al. (2016) in Eq. (6)
(Fig. 10). The slip motion of S is assumed to be pure thrust against the
subducting plate motion. Note that C is constant against time and the
post-seismic slip pj is not considered in the present analysis; thus,
it is possible that the scenario source models will slightly overestimate S.

The variable slip distribution was obtained from the heterogeneous
interseismic coupling C. Time intervals for the integral of Eq. (6)
are assumed to be 94 years (1922 to 2016). Each segment is subdivided into
10 km×10 km subspace knots for 150×160 and 180×160 km2 source
areas for S1 and S2, respectively. While the magnitude of the event related
to segment S1 is Mw=8.2, the magnitude of the S2 event is Mw=8.4. If both
segments are considered together (S3=S1+S2), the total magnitude is
Mw=8.5. The strike and dip angles for the scenario source geometry are assumed
to be constant based on the subducting slab geometry of the Slab 1.0 model
(Hayes et al., 2012): (strike, dip)=(2.7,
15.0∘) for S1 and (strike, dip)=(16.0,
15.0∘) for S2. The fault geometry and characteristic source
parameters, as well as complete model parameters for each scenario source
model, are available from the authors upon request.

4.2 Numerical simulation of proposed tsunami scenario

The computation covered an elapsed time of 6 h with output intervals of
1 min. Figure 11 shows the main results and the three different tsunami
scenario combinations. The upper row shows the results for segment S1
(Mw=8.2) and the middle row shows the results for segment S2 (Mw=8.4), while the
lower row shows the results for the combined scenario of S1 and S2 (Mw=8.5).
In addition, the left column shows the vertical displacement of the
seafloor, the middle column shows the maximum inundation depth and the right
column shows the tsunami wave form at the Coquimbo tide gauge over an
elapsed time of 4 h (240 min). It is observed that segment S2 (Mw=8.4)
generated lower inundation depths than segment S1 (Mw=8.2), which can be
explained by the fact that the strike angle and the coastal morphology cause
the tsunami to be propagated toward the north and not directly toward
Coquimbo Bay. Meanwhile, the tsunami generated by segment S1, the second
wave of which is the largest, propagates directly toward Coquimbo Bay. It is
possible to observe that the maximum inundation depths reached up to 5 m in
developed areas and along the coastline. Moreover, it is interesting that
the Mw=8.5 event, as a combination of S1 and S2 (lower row in Fig. 11),
generated lower inundation depths than segment S1 alone. This can be
explained by the fact that the maximum tsunami amplitude of each individual
event does not occur at the same time; thus, the segment S2 tsunami
decreases the maximum amplitude of the segment S1 tsunami. Larger tsunami
amplitudes could result from a time gap between the segment S1 and S2 events
such that the maximum tsunami waves coincide. Nevertheless, this analysis is
beyond the scope of the present paper.

4.3 Damage to structures

The previous section demonstrated that the combination of S1 and S2
rupturing at the same time generated lower inundation heights than the
S1 event alone; therefore, the damage to structures is assessed for segment S1
only, i.e., a tsunami generated by a Mw=8.2 earthquake off the coast of
Coquimbo that generates inundation heights lower than 5 m. Figure 12 shows
the results for each tsunami intensity measure, namely inundation depth,
flow velocity and hydrodynamic force (upper row panels). In addition, the lower row
in Fig. 12 shows the difference between the maximum tsunami intensity
measures given by the S1 scenario and those of the simulated 2015 tsunami
event (Fig. 7). This figure allows areas with a greater increase in
tsunami intensity measure and therefore higher damage probability to be identified.

In order to determine a high or low probability of damage to a given
structure, first latitude and longitude coordinates are assigned to each
structure within the inundation area, and the maximum inundation depths
given by the tsunami numerical simulation at the location of each structure
are exported to GIS. Second, the inundation depth database is divided into
several ranges, with 40 samples in each range, and the mean value of each
range is intersected with the fragility curve given in Fig. 8c in order to
define the damage probability for each range. For simplicity, and similar to
previous studies (Fraser et al., 2014; Wiebe and
Cox, 2014), we used only the fragility curve generated as a function of the
inundation depth. Third, the damage probability given in the previous step
is assumed to be equal to the percentage of structures with a high
probability of damage within each range. To make this determination, the
inundation depths for each range are arranged in descending order and the
structures outside of that percentage (with the lowest inundation depth
within the range) are assumed to have a low probability of damage.

Figure 13(a) Tsunami inundation map and inundation depth on structures.
(b) Tsunami inundation map and low and high probabilities of damage
to the flooded structures.

Figure 13a shows the low-lying area of the city of Coquimbo and the computed
inundation depth given by the numerical simulation of scenario S1. A total of
646 mixed-material structures were identified within the inundation area, and
they are colored according to inundation depth level. Figure 13b shows the
result of the damage estimation. It was found that 321 structures, i.e.,
49.6 % of the flooded structures, have a high probability of damage, a
figure that is much higher than the 20 % surveyed right after the
2015 tsunami. As expected, the structures behind the railway embankment and
wetland would experience less damage than those located close to the shore.

Due to the high probability of damage to houses located near the shore, it
is recommended that any reconstruction plan or future tsunami mitigation
measures consider the fact that high tsunami inundation depths (5–8 m) could
be generated in this area. After the 2011 Japan tsunami, it has been
demonstrated that comprehensive urban planning is the key point for avoiding
future disasters, such that the best approach to decrease tsunami risk is an
integration of structural and nonstructural means of coastal protection and
land-use management as a strategy with multiple lines of defense
(Strusińska-Correia, 2017). In addition, the
most important lessons from the 2011 Japan tsunami include methods to
strengthen coastal defense structures, evacuation buildings and coastal
forests (Suppasri et al., 2016). Thus, Coquimbo
seems to be an interesting case study since the coastal road, wetland and
railway partly fulfill the structural requirements of a multilayer tsunami
countermeasure, and it would be necessary to implement more comprehensive
nonstructural countermeasures in the future. In a local context,
Khew et al. (2015) found that the tsunami
countermeasures implemented in the Greater Concepción area after the
2010 Chile tsunami, such as hard infrastructure, contributed positively to the
recovery of economic and social resilience, although it was found that new
elevated housing decreased social resilience. Moreover, it is recommended
that governmental and business structures be effectively decentralized such
that local conditions are successfully incorporated into the design of hard
infrastructure for tsunami mitigation (Khew et
al., 2015). Finally, it was also found that tsunami mitigation measures
implemented in Dichato after the 2010 Chile tsunami did not decrease tsunami
risk, as some vulnerability variables (housing conditions, low household
incomes and limited knowledge of tsunami events) are still at the same level
(Martínez et al., 2017). Therefore, nonstructural mitigation measures should play an important role
in effectively decreasing tsunami risk in the future.

Numerical simulations of the 2015 Chile tsunami proved to be in good
agreement with field survey data in Coquimbo. A Coquimbo fragility curve was
developed with two-level classification of structural damage, namely,
not destroyed and destroyed. The Coquimbo fragility curve shows a
low probability of damage, 20 %, at a relatively high inundation depth
(2 m), in contrast to what was observed in another Chilean town, Dichato,
where a 68 % probability of damage resulted from the same inundation
depth. This result is in good agreement with fragility curves for the Sendai
and Ishinomaki plains in Japan, in that tsunami energy decreased and less
damage was observed.

The fragility curve may be used to estimate possible future tsunami damage
in the Coquimbo area and other places with similar topography and building
materials. In Coquimbo, it was found that a magnitude Mw=8.2 earthquake off
the coast of the city could generate a destructive tsunami with inundation
depths of up to 5 m. The assessment of tsunami damage with the fragility
curve demonstrated that ∼50 % of the assessed structures
have a high probability of damage if reconstruction is carried out with
the same types of structures, which is greater than the damage caused by the
2015 tsunami (20 %). Therefore, tsunami mitigation measures and the
reconstruction plan should consider potential tsunami damage due to a future
earthquake off the coast of Coquimbo. It is recommended that new land-use
policies be implemented in order to regulate the types of structures being
built in the inundation area. In addition, based on previous experience in
Japan and Chile, new tsunami mitigation measures must consider a combination
of both structural and nonstructural tsunami countermeasures in order to
effectively decrease tsunami risk in Coquimbo in the future.

The idea was conceived by LU and RA. The field survey of
damaged structures was carried out by LU, while the field survey of tsunami
inundation heights and run-ups was carried out by RA and LU. All numerical
simulations were performed by RA. Tsunami fragility curves were developed by RA
and LU, while RO and YY proposed the tsunami source model for the application of
fragility curves. LU assessed damage to structures and RA prepared the first
manuscript; thus all authors contributed to editing the final version of the article.

The authors would like to thank CONICYT (Chile) for its FONDAP 15110017 and
FONDECYT 11140424 grants, as well as the Research and Innovation Department
(Dirección de Investigación e Innovación) of the Universidad
Católica Ssma. Concepción. Special thanks to those who contributed
to the collection of field data: Enrique Muñoz and Evelyn Pedrero,
Evans Aravena, and Diego Espinoza. Thanks to the Ministry of Housing for
providing us with topography data. Finally, thanks to the two anonymous reviewers,
who significantly helped us improve the paper.

Nishenko, S. P.: Seismic potential for large and great interplate earthquakes
along the Chilean and Southern Peruvian Margins of South America: A quantitative
reappraisal, J. Geophys. Res., 90, 3589–3615, https://doi.org/10.1029/JB090iB05p03589, 1985.

The present research applies a methodology to estimate tsunami damage in a city in northern Chile which was recently affected by a tsunami and is now under reconstruction. The results are in good agreement with other results from plains in Japan, where low damage was observed at relatively high inundation depths. In addition, the damage assessment showed a significant impact in the city in the case of a new tsunami event if the city is rebuilt with the same type of structures.

The present research applies a methodology to estimate tsunami damage in a city in northern...